Warana-.Agro Pvt Ltd And Anr vs Sadashiv Shankar Patil & Ors

Warana-Agro Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Appellants

Versus

Sadashiv Shankar Patil & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellants: Mr. Prashant S. Kenjale and Mr. Nishant, Advocates

ORDER

03.10.2018 This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the

order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai

in an application filed under Section 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956

(Section 251 and 252 of the Companies Act, 2013). Learned counsel for the

appellant sought permission to make necessary corrections in the paper book

and making the appeal under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013. Prayer

is allowed. He is allowed to make necessary corrections in the paper book and

cover page. Office is directed to provide with Company Appeal (AT) number

under the provisions of the Companies Act.

2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant (respondent) against the

order dated 22nd December, 2017 with a petition for condonation of delay. From

the impugned order, we find that the certified copy of the impugned order has

been served on the appellant on 31st January, 2018 but in spite of this fact the

appellant has filed the appeal on 29th August, 2018. As per sub-section (3) of

Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 the appeal has to be filed within forty-

five days from the date of receipt of the order on showing sufficient cause and -2-

grounds. The Appellate Tribunal has jurisdiction to condone the delay but not

exceeding forty-five days.

3. In the present appeal we find there is a delay of 244 days and the Appellate

Tribunal having no jurisdiction to condone such period, the prayer for

condonation of delay is rejected.

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in Consumer

Protection Act matter has been referred by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to larger

Bench but in view of the specific provision, we cannot allow the application for

condonation of delay. I.A. No. 1570 of 2018 is rejected being barred by limitation.

5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed being barred by limitation. No cost

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Member (Judicial)

/ns/gc/

Company Appeal (AT) No. 339 of 2018